Legal Opinion

City of Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 24, 1979No. Appeal, No. 584 C.D. 1978PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Wilkinson, Jr.,

As a result of the lengthy United Mine Workers strike which started on December 6, 1977 intervenor, *244Duquesne Light Company (Duquesne) sought by petition filed with the Public Utility Commission (Commission) on February 6, 1978 permission to file a tariff supplement, effective on one day’s notice, establishing an “emergency surcharge” in the amount of $.003 per kilowatt hour. Duquesne averred that the coal shortage resulting from the strike had forced it to make extraordinary purchases of power from other utilities to supplement a diminished generating capacity.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  2. Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  4. Citizens Water Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  5. Johnstown v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Barasch v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Green v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Western Pennsylvania Water Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  4. Popowsky v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. Cohen v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API